Former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky is led away in handcuffs Friday June 22, 2012, after he was found guilty on 45 of 48 counts for the sexual abuse of 10 boys over a 15-year period. (AP photo)

They have some sense of clo­sure now that a jury has found him guilty, but they'll have to live the rest of their lives coming to terms with his abuse.

It's not over for Sandusky himself. The monster found guilty Friday of 45 of the 48 counts against him for the sexual abuse of 10 boys over 15 years will be kept in custody while he undergoes extensive testing be­fore he's sentenced.

He also could face more charges. Lawyers for his adopted son Matt said he's told law enforcement offi­cials that Sandusky molested him.

It's not over, either, for former Penn State officials that appear to have enabled Sandusky's abuse by not alerting authorities to what they knew at least as early as 2001. The athletics director, now on leave, and a former university vice president both face charges of lying to a grand jury and failing to report allegations of child abuse.

Sandusky may have coached his last season as Joe Paterno's long-­time defensive coordinator in 1999, but this isn't over for the school or its beloved football program.

Sand­usky should get life in prison.

Penn State could get the death penalty.

If not them, who?

If not now, when?

The NCAA has been respectful of the legal process, as it should be, since the world first learned of the horrible allegations against Sand­usky last November. The NCAA will have to continue to be patient because the legal sys­tem has yet to run its course.

There's a July 11 hearing scheduled for Penn State AD Tim Curley and former VP Gary Schultz, the two men charged with lying to the grand jury that investigated the abuse charges against Sandusky and failing to report allegations against him stemming from a 2001 incident in a shower in the school's football building.

Curley and Schultz, what they knew, when they knew it and what they did and didn't do about it, could be at the heart of the most serious infractions case in NCAA history.

Kevin Scarbinsky is a columnist for The Birmingham News. His column is published on Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday.

NCAA President Mark Emmert made that very point in a letter to Penn State's president last November. Emmert wrote that the NCAA would examine "Penn State's exercise of institutional control."

Tuesday's testimony by former Penn State quarterback and assistant coach Mike McQueary sounded like evidence of a lack of institutional control at a program more interested in controlling information and protecting its own reputation.

McQueary told the jury what he saw Sandusky doing to a young boy in a shower in the Penn State football building in 2001. McQueary also said, despite not going into graphic detail, he made what he saw clear to Paterno.

"I made sure he knew it was sexual and it was wrong," McQueary said.

Paterno told the AD, Curley. More than a week later, Curley called McQueary into a meeting with himself and Schultz, the VP whose areas of supervision included the university police. Yet neither Curley, Schultz nor Paterno went to the police. Sandusky continued to hang around the football program. Prosecutors said and the jury believed that he continued to molest young boys.

McQueary, despite what he saw, stayed with the football program himself, though he testified that he steered clear of Sandusky.

Why didn't McQueary quit? His answer was a testament to the power of Penn State football. "I would never resign from Penn State University," he said.

No doubt the NCAA enforcement staff has never investigated a case quite like this one. It'll be important for those investigators to note several key points.

The charges Sandusky was convicted of began while he was still the Penn State defensive coordinator, and local authorities investigated one of those incidents in 1998, though they didn't prosecute.

Consider what NBC reported last week: The Pennsylvania attorney general has emails between Penn State's president, VP and AD indicating that McQueary was clear on what he told them in 2001 and they didn't turn over that information to law enforcement because they wanted to be "humane" to Sandusky.

Were they really trying to protect the program by protecting a child molester? If so, there's only one way to punish a program like that beyond the civil lawsuits the university itself is facing.